On 25 March 2013 20:58, Rafael Schloming <r...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Rajith Attapattu <rajit...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Rafael Schloming <r...@alum.mit.edu> > > wrote: > > JMS does provide the Destination interface, and Queues and Topics are > > indeed special cases. > > > > To provide some historical context, not knowing if it's a Topic or > > Queue has been a general issue in our code base not just for this > > equals issue. > > Hence the suggestions from Robbie and me about specifying a type. > > Our products were heavily geared towards the hub-and-spoke model and > > Queues and Topics are fundamental in this model. > > > > I don't see what the "hub and spoke" model has to do with this at all. > Pretty much every broker already supports things that don't really act like > queues or topics. > > --Rafael >
I think a more accurate explanation would be that historically the JMS client has focused on providing a way of implementing JMS over AMQP, rather than a way of exposing AMQP through JMS. That is to say its focus has been JMS rather than AMQP and this is clearly something that causes issues when attempting to interoperate with clients other than itself. This is something we should address (no pun intended) going forward. -- Rob
